Wellsy, we're not RFL Marketeers it's up to them to build the profile of RL over the next 3 years, to get the media onside & really Market the RLWC 2013 well to get as many RL fans going to it as possible. Must aim higher.

I know this, you know this, but ParisS seems to think that by saying "serious marketing campaign" it actually has some meaning. There are budgets and other obstacles that restrict us. There is always room for improvement, and we should be getting better crowds. But it is ridiculous to think that we could get a decent crowd at Old Trafford (75k) for a semi final not involving England when we have only touched above 30k once with a semi final involving England.

What sort of miracle marketing campaign would turn around that record?

Yeah, fair enough, I agree. Although I would like to see a good, new-ish, well built 25,000+ stadium to play the semi-final not containing England. I'd hope with good marketting and special ticket deals we could get well over 15,000 but maybe I'm dreaming.

Edited by HappyDave, 25 August 2010 - 11:47 AM.

"I've never seen a woman with hairy ears... And I've been to St Helens" - John Bishop

Yeah, fair enough, I agree. Although I would like to see a good, new-ish, well built 25,000+ stadium to play the semi-final not containing England. I'd hope with good marketting and special ticket deals we could get well over 15,000 but maybe I'm dreaming.

I am sure that if this event is marketed properly you could be expecting crowds of 12,000-15,000 even for minor nation contests, like Lebanon vs USA

Not even close for games like that. If they can barely get 15,000 for a Tri Series encounter between GB and New Zealand at the birthplace of the sport then forget it. Brits expected the Kiwis to win and didn't turn out in the force that they should have done. As it happens, GB won the game. And marketing had ###### all to do with any of the above. Even ticketing deals.

Actually I said 30,000+ stadium and hope for well over 20,000 fans but chickened out.

I would hope with raising the profile of RL & plenty of promotion & ticket deals I would like to see over 20,000 fans going to the none England semi-final but I'm sad to admit I know that's extremely unlikely.

"I've never seen a woman with hairy ears... And I've been to St Helens" - John Bishop

Actually I said 30,000+ stadium and hope for well over 20,000 fans but chickened out.

I would hope with raising the profile of RL & plenty of promotion & ticket deals I would like to see over 20,000 fans going to the none England semi-final but I'm sad to admit I know that's extremely unlikely.

Totally depends on the format for me.

At the end of the day, it's pretty certain that England, New Zealand and Australia will be 3 of the 4 teams. So it depends on:

1. which two of them teams are playing each other2. who the fourth team are3. whether England are playing the fourth team or one of the other big two.

The problem is, unless the format is construed in a way that England are playing a certain team, there is no way to predict this sort of thing. To me, with the possibility of certain games, your most likely attendances will be around these marks:

England vs New Zealand (20k), Australia vs AN Other (12k)England vs Australia (30k), New Zealand vs AN Other (10k)England vs AN Other (15k), New Zealand vs Australia (20k)

Something like Elland Road and Keepmoat would probably be suitable if we wanted a good sell out. But they don't seem that ambitious really. It's a shame really, but without other teams that will draw in a decent crowd, this will always be the case. I can't see England vs France, Wales, Fiji, Tonga, PNG, Samoa, etc. drawing 20k at this stage. And certainly can't see Aus/NZ versus the above drawing anywhere near it.

If the format is 4 groups, with the top of each group going into the semi-finals, then you could guarantee England would be in a certain semi-final venue.

This is why I wouldn't suggest using certain stadia at certain points until the format is announced (other than the final being a must at Wembley).

With 14 teams, 4 groups implies two with 4 teams and two with 3. If they want an England-Australia or England-NZ game in the group stage to create a buzz they can't risk letting only 4 teams advance from that stage in case England loses their first game like in 2000. It's more likely they'd have 6 advancing past the group stage with the winners of the 4-team groups going right into the semi-finals and the other 4 teams into two quarter-finals. Putting the big 3 in the two 4-team groups more or less guarantees they'll all advance without any real bother and would give England (providing they can beat Australia or NZ who they'd presumably play first) the chance to qualify directly for the semi-finals.

I've thought for some time they should tailor things as closely as possible to how the 1995 World Cup was run, with a bit more ambition where venues are concerned.

The following is a mock up I just did at work. It's based on the 4,4,3,3 format with the winners of the big groups to go straight through and the runners up to play the winners of the other groups in quarter finals.

We won't know exactly what league grounds will be built for a while yet but this format gives most of the good RL grounds a game, includes some expansion areas like Wales, Scotland, Ireland, London and Paris, takes travel into account, looks at where best to play certain games and aims high enough without being too optimistic.

"get the marketing right" to me this means letting fans know when games are taking place :ie the teams, the venue's the KO times the admission prices, parking, public transport to the ground. we as fans can do our bit by letting family, friends and work colleague's know when this and other Rugby League events are taking place. this weekends Carnige Challenge cup final is a sell out as regards both clubs taking part in the final have sold out of tickets, lets hope that the Grand Final is a sell out as well, and yes and it can be done if we "get the marketing right"

There was ###### all promotion of the RLWC here in Australia, both by the ARL and the broadcaster Channel Nine.

If it was promoted better, no doubt there would have been better crowds.

Well I was there and I saw loads of advertising for it, certainly a damn sight more than you'd get in this country. There were TV adverts, billboards everywhere, lots of newspaper articles and other media coverage, it was all over the Jetstar planes etc etc

Have you recently walked 500 miles ? Were you advised to walk 500 more ? Did you fall down at someone's door ?

I guess there was some advertsing done in 2008 but it was very budget stuff, in fact mostly free stuff from News Ltd. And obviously the press coverage in NSW and Qld would have been pretty significant. But it was still low key compared to the NRL or Origin. It's partly due to the timing, being the off-season, and partly due to the perception that IRL is insignificant. Channel Nine did a ###### job promoting and broadcasting it. It was an after-thought for them and, to be fair, the whole country really.

You seem to have omitted Wakefield and Castleford, surely both venues would be worthy of a semi-final at least?

I know you're being sarcastic, but I actually would have included one or both if we knew they were going to be built by then.

It actually poses an interesting point about how far RL stadia has come since 2000. Back then there was only three or four all-seat new stadiums in RL towns. There were more games in 2000, but even so we now have enough new stadiums in RL towns to cover the tournament with a few games to expansion areas and a few to soccer stadiums. In 2000 we had heaps of games in non RL towns but still had to use gronds like The Boulevard, Derwent Park, Knowsley, Craven Park - The Jungle hosted a quarter final FFS! By 2013 there may be so many new boutique venues in RL heartlands that there might not be enough games to go around them all.

I guess there was some advertsing done in 2008 but it was very budget stuff, in fact mostly free stuff from News Ltd. And obviously the press coverage in NSW and Qld would have been pretty significant. But it was still low key compared to the NRL or Origin. It's partly due to the timing, being the off-season, and partly due to the perception that IRL is insignificant. Channel Nine did a ###### job promoting and broadcasting it. It was an after-thought for them and, to be fair, the whole country really.

For the next three years Super League vs ARL war divided the Australian code. A Super League representative side came to Britain in 1997. No doubt it was not considered a regular Test. Here were the crowds:

So except for the 1995 pool match and the 1997 Super League Test, all Wembley crowds have been over 50,000.

We also see that in each years series of Tests Wembley has attracted more fans than either Old Trafford or Elland Road.

Obviously a properly administered World Cup could expect more than 50,000 at Wembley for a final, and for a semi-final involving England. A crowd of over 73,000 has already been achieved there for a World Cup final, and could be realised under a competent management team in 2013.

Please stop posting that Wembley should be used. 15000 in a 90000 stadium would look shockingly bad.

Even England v Australia in a final will not top 50k

Not quite 15000, but 25000 would still look empty, play the final at Man City, Semis at Bolton's Reebok & KC Stadium, England Matches at Saints, Salford (If they finish building both by then) and Headingley, New Zealand v Australia at Loftus Road (always packed during 4 Nations), Other Group A games at Doncaster, and Warrington, other pool games at Halton CS, Leigh SV, Hull KR, Rodney Parade, Tolouse, Perpignan, (avoid Paris, bad idea) Brewery Field or Parc Y Scarlets Llanelli, Dublin (not Lansdowne or Croake Park) and Belfast, & Edinburgh OR Glasgow (but not when Hearts/Hibs & Rangers/Celtic at home).

Edited by Bleep1673, 28 August 2010 - 08:46 AM.

Swinton RLFC est 1866 - Supplying England with players when most of your clubs were in nappies

Not quite 15000, but 25000 would still look empty, play the final at Man City, Semis at Bolton's Reebok & KC Stadium, England Matches at Saints, Salford (If they finish building both by then) and Headingley, New Zealand v Australia at Loftus Road (always packed during 4 Nations), Other Group A games at Doncaster, and Warrington, other pool games at Halton CS, Leigh SV, Hull KR, Rodney Parade, Tolouse, Perpignan, (avoid Paris, bad idea) Brewery Field or Parc Y Scarlets Llanelli, Dublin (not Lansdowne or Croake Park) and Belfast, & Edinburgh OR Glasgow (but not when Hearts/Hibs & Rangers/Celtic at home).

Where does this figure of 25,000 come from? Are you incapable of reading previous posts?

I have pointed out that during the decade of the 1990s, when rugby league Tests were played regularly at Wembley, there was never a Wembley crowd less than 40,000 and most matches were over 50,000. One crowd was over 73,000 and another over 66,000. Yet you bring up a crowd of 25,000 which has no basis in reality.

Why can't you make predictions based on evidence of past experience, rather than based on nothing?